468 •' " eECERAt BePOETER. �by Sound considerati'bns of judieial judgment, each case to be determined k.ccording to itë own circumstances. High on Eeceivers, § 65 ; Kerr on Eeceivers, (Bisph. Ed.) § 577. Pri- vate preferences must yield to public considerations; and no man can claim it for himself or his particular friend, especially in a case like this, where so many absent parties, not known to the record, and who are and doubtless will remain quite ignorant of these proceedings, are interested in the subject- matter of this controversy. Re Empire City Bank, 10 How. Pr. 498; Edwards on Eeceivers, 2G0. �Most of these objections tvould have great force, if, in the relations we bear to the state of Missouri, it is to be treated as a foreign state, and its citizens entitled in our courts to sucb considerations only as are given to foreigners. It must be conceded that in this matter of insolvent laws, and the admin- istration of assets situcîted in different states, there bas grown up a selfishness which cornes very near to that which abso- Intely foreign states show to each" other. But, af ter ail, prin- ciples oî courtesy and comity do prevail, and the insolvent lawS of one state may be permittedto operate in another state, for the promotion of justice, wheri neither.the latter state nor itJB citizens will suffer any inconvenience or injury theireby, and the title of a foreign receiver will be recognized- where it can be done^ without detriment to the citizens of the state grantifig the recognition. High on Eeceivers, § 47. �I have no doubt that this court is so far a court of the state of Tennessee that it is its duty to afford ail the protection to the plaintifïs in this case which a state court would or should afford to its own citizens. But it is also true, that because of a fear — whether well or ill founded, it is not material to in- quire — that state tribunals would give more consideration to the interests of the citizens of the state than would always be justified in controversies between their own and citizens of other states, the federal courts have been invested with con- current jurisdietion over such conti*oversies. This seems to imply that in this court, at least, the citizens of other states should not be considered so much as foreigners, and their uon-residence here should not weigh bo much against them in ����
